Josh McNeill

Tag: politics (Page 2 of 2)

Did you notice the financial world crumbling yesterday?

September 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments

I wouldn’t be surprised if you haven’t. It’s very easy and common to have a disconnect from the happenings in the world anymore. So even when we may have been witnessing the biggest financial catastrophe (or the greatest financial bet) in the last one hundred years most of you probably didn’t bat an eyelash. I think that’s a problem.

Yesterday the House of Representatives voted down the financial bail out bill. Some 40% of Democrats voted against the bill as well as the majority of Republicans. The bill failed by twelve votes and the market reacted with the biggest single day point drop, for the DOW, in history. That’s not in the last decade or two, that’s ever. This isn’t the biggest problem though, the biggest problem is that credit may just completely freeze up. Anyone who needs a loan for anything (a house, a car, payroll, to order inventory) may be out of luck. Our credit based economy could very soon come to a halt. Some people have even said that your ATM or credit card may not work anymore. That one is a bit of a stretch but I think it’s worth it to check the performance of your bank’s stock. ING has dropped from $48 to $20 in the last six months so I’ve seriously considered moving my money.

There is a really good side to this. The bet that a lot of politicians in the House are betting on is that doing nothing is doing the most to fix this problem. After all, why should we prop up failing businesses? Maybe we should let those businesses fail, even if it hits us hard in a lot of ways, so that better businesses can take their place. This may even be the best way to keep our market free while giving powerful firms a very good reason not to partake in the shady trading practices that helped get us here in the first place. The bill was going to include oversight on this kind of thing but wouldn’t it be nice if we instead told the market that if they screw up it’s completely on their shoulders? It’s like teaching a kid responsibility. You don’t help them learn this valuable skill by fixing all the problems they create for themselves.

Of course, there are very good reasons for propping these businesses up like I have mentioned already. In the end this all seems like a wild guess at which choice will help the most. No one is crunching numbers to find out and it wouldn’t really be helpful as economics is as much a social phenomenon as it is a mathematical phenomenon. Personally, I lean to the “let the crap fall out” side but I’m regularly going back and forth on the issue. The only thing I know for sure is that you should all be paying attention. As much as we all like to think we live in a vacuum, we really don’t. We elect the people who decide these things and their decisions could decide whether we enter another Great Depression or not. If we do, it’s not the politicians we should blame, it’s the people. We should blame the people who have become lazy and bought into the idea that nothing we do makes a difference. We should blame the people that take the success of their nation for granted and choose to forgo the voting rights that others in the past were willing to die for, whether they were soldiers or just minorities that wanted a voice. In short, inform yourself.

Which side should he pander to?

September 23, 2008 / / 0 Comments

It appears John McCain really can’t decide whether he wants to pander to hardcore conservatives or moderates and liberals. He has spent the last week blasting the system that allowed the market to become deregulated to the point that we have financial meltdown and now he’s going on television saying that deregulations have helped grow the economy. This really is like the Twilight Zone. You can’t have it both ways. Either regulations were a bad thing or they were a good thing. This is just like when he went on TV and said that he’s an ardent supporter of George Bush and then went around campaigning as if he’s the polar opposite and will bring tons of reform to Washington. I really hope this sort of newspeak isn’t convincing anyone.

The first presidential debate is Friday at 8pm on just about every channel. Watch it.

Republicans don’t want poor people to vote?

September 19, 2008 / / 0 Comments

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/17/uselections2008.democrats

My headline isn’t as one sided as it sounds. Apparently Republicans are using the foreclosure crisis to stop people from voting. If someone has been foreclosed on they want said person’s address placed on a list at the voting stations so that anyone who wants to vote and is listed as living at that address, can’t. A little fishy, eh? This is supposedly an effort to lower voter fraud, which may be true in some part, but my guess (and only a guess) is that it’s also an effort to stop black people, who according to polls and history are much more likely to vote for Obama, from voting.

The one face saver the Republicans have in this little dispute is the argument of responsibility. I’m not talking about being responsible enough to not be foreclosed on or earning the right to vote by making good financial decisions. I’m talking about being responsible enough to update your address on your voter registration card. You can change that address regardless of whether you own the home you’re now staying at. This is a good argument. My only counter is that some people don’t have a home after going through foreclosure. They also may have been forced to move as far as another state and only temporarily. If you have lived in location A for 30 years and 3 months before the election you’re forced to move to location B, you probably want to eventually move back to location A. Why should your vote be counted in a state that you have nothing to do with and won’t have anything to do with in the future? This is a way to redraw the electoral map although I admit this isn’t the greatest argument against saying people should be responsible enough to update their address.

Either way, I don’t see how this would combat fraud. Why would someone be able to vote in multiple locations just because their house is in foreclosure? Why would a foreclosed home be prone to being used by multiple people as their residence when voting? These things lead me to believe that this is just Republicans being incredibly screwed up.

And yes, foreclosures do affect minorities more than whites.
http://www.foreclosurelistings.com/blog/foreclosure-victims/minorities-worst-affected-by-foreclosures.htm

The economy under Obama.

September 17, 2008 / / 0 Comments

Today Obama gave a speech on the economy. The whole speech (38 minutes) is on YouTube. He basically lays out the actions he would take to straighten out the problems we’re having while simultaneously pointing out the fact that McCain has no idea what he’s doing. Check it out. Make up your own mind.

Why do you care if big banks go under?

September 15, 2008 / / 2 Comments

Lehman Brothers Holdings filed for bankruptcy today. Check it out:

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200809151141DOWJONESDJONLINE000528_FORTUNE5.htm

They’re a big bank with a lot of investments in real estate. They’ve gone under because of the housing crisis. Big deal, right? A bunch of rich people lost their money/jobs, what does that matter?

It actually matters a lot. We’re all intimately connected with the big banks of our country whether we want to be or not. Even if you don’t have a bank account, credit card, or investment you will still be affected by things like this. It’s a big domino effect. When a bank has huge investments and they go under, all those businesses and people they’re invested in have a good chance of going under as well. They can be bought up by the government or other banks and that might help but it also puts a lot of stress on the economy in general. If some other bank has to buy this failing bank, that’s a lot of bank A’s capital that can’t be used to invest in successful businesses. Suddenly loans are harder to get and interest rates go up. Businesses that are being invested in by these banks that are trying to save their bank brothers now have more overhead so they have incentive to raise the prices on their goods.

That’s right, some rich guys in a big building somewhere out there in corporate land, making irresponsible deals to try and make a quick buck, ultimately help to screw over those of us who are just trying to get by. So, get rid of the big evil banks right? No. The problem isn’t that someone is out there trying to make a buck from their buck, it’s that they’re doing so in shady ways. There’s a lot of benefit to be had by having huge businesses situated in our country. It increases the country’s capital and trading power with other countries. That can only be beneficial. But we need to make sure that the people in direct control of all this capital aren’t doing really stupid things like giving loans to thousands of people who they know can’t afford them.

This brings us, ultimately, back to the election. All this has happened under Bushy’s watch. Bush isn’t running again, thankfully, but McCain is. Now, if McCain circa 2000 was running, that may not be so bad. The problem is McCain circa 2008 is running. This is a guy who not so long ago told Tim Russert on Meet the Press that the fundamentals of the economy are strong. This is a guy that during the Republican primary debates said he didn’t have enough expertise in economics to answer a question. This is a guy who has been supporting Bush’s policies for the last few years 90% of the time. This is also a guy who tries to deny all of this when these facts are re-introduced to him.

What we have here is the perpetual sinking of the Titanic. Bear Stearns crashed, Lehman crashed, Fannie and Freddie were taken over. These are all financial institutions that, in previous eras, were considered impenetrable. So, try to give a shit. You can vote in November. You can vote for your members of congress soon too. It does make a difference.

UPDATE: Wow. I just found out that McCain, today of all days, repeated his belief that the fundamentals of the economy are good. Today, after Lehman Brothers collapsed, he claimed that the fundamentals are strong. Let me just repeat this for emphasis. John McCain, today, has said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong. Here’s the video.

McCain’s healthcare “plan”.

September 14, 2008 / / 0 Comments

I was watching the News and a McCain supporter talked about how McCain’s plan offered greater portability and the Obama supporter that was on said that was completely false. I checked it since I didn’t think it was true either and it turns out that he does want greater portability. He doesn’t say anything about how to achieve this but he does say he would like to keep it that way.

I ended up reading through his whole “plan” and, by the end, I couldn’t figure out what his “plan” actually was. He often repeats how he wants to keep control in the hands of the people and increase competition but there’s barely a word about how he would do that. The only thing I found that seemed like a concise idea that would be helpful was to make healthcare available between states.

That was it though. Other than that little tidbit, the plan seems to consist of a wish list that doesn’t even fit together. He stresses free market ideas, lowering costs, and making sure that no one, regardless of health, is denied care. The first two parts might work really well except that he doesn’t accept the fact that people would most likely have to be denied insurance if costs are going to go down. I’m not a healthcare expert but how do you set laws that stop insurers from denying insurance to people with pre-existing chronic illnesses and not increase costs? Wouldn’t that mean that insurers are taking on customers who would immediately be a loss to their business?

If someone wants to show me how this is a good plan or even a plan at all, I’m cool with that. Otherwise, things like this make me really wonder why anyone likes McCain. Maybe they don’t and it’s really Palin vs Obama.

McCain’s Healthcare Plan

Lies are awesome.

September 10, 2008 / / 0 Comments

So far this election year hasn’t been too bad on the stretch-the-truth meter. I’ve been following it closely since the beginning of the primaries and, while there have been some out of context statements, pretty much every inaccurate claim has only been a small stretch of the truth. Now that we’re less than two months away from voting day it appears that blatant lies are the way to go. The Washington Post wrote a good article on this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/09/AR2008090903727.html

The article lists lies from both sides but, and maybe this is just a bias of mine, the McCain camp seems to have the big ones. Obama’s mistakes consisted of claiming that McCain wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years and saying that McCain thinks the fundamentals of the economy are sound. McCain really did say both of these things. The 100 years in Iraq statement is a bit out of context since he’s talking about keeping forces there in the same vein as we have in places like Germany. The problem with that is that Germany isn’t fighting off insurgents like Iraq. The situations are completely different. But still, it was a stretch of the truth on Obama’s part. And the sound economy statement, well, I don’t even know what McCain really thinks. He’s talked about how the economy is in trouble quite often but the statement he made about how it was doing well was made on Meet the Press some six months ago or so. On that episode he was being asked about his connections with Bush. He was basically pandering to the Bush crowd by saying how often he has agreed with Bush and how the economy is doing just fine because of him. So what’s his deal? Is he a Bush-y or is he a maverick? I really don’t know anymore.

On the lies from the McCain camp, here’s a list.

Palin turned down the bridge to nowhere. FALSE
– She actually campaigned in support of the bridge until she won her election for governor, then she decided she didn’t want the bridge. She also didn’t give back the money that congress gave her for said bridge.

Obama will raise taxes on everyone. FALSE
– Yeah, he’ll actually lower taxes more than McCain for everyone except those who make more than $250,000. It works out to be an increase for 10% of Americans and a cut for 81%. This one is so blatantly false and repeated so ridiculously often that I think it may be the biggest misconception of the year. I frequent a forum with a lot of people who are interested in politics and even they think Obama is going to raise everyone’s taxes. Did you see the percentage of seniors who think Obama will raise their taxes? 41%?! That’s insane given that seniors who make under $50,000 a year will literally pay $0, ZERO DOLLARS, in taxes. I’m sorry, but this one bothers me a lot.

This is going to take longer than I expected so I’ll leave the list at only two lies. There are plenty of others though. The point is, pay attention, check out the facts at places like FactCheck.org. This is why it’s important to vote. Do you want to end up with completely unfounded bullshit for the next four years? It makes a difference. There was a lot more opportunity in this country eight years ago, remember that.

And don’t forget to check out the debate on the 26th. I’m sure a lot of this will come out there.

Debates and God’s plan.

September 7, 2008 / / 0 Comments

So has McCain given up on the secular vote?

That was McCain’s vice presidential candidate. It appears that if he is elected we will once again have God running our country. Seeing as I don’t believe in God, I find that frightening. If you do believe in God then maybe you feel different. Seriously though, you should vote if you haven’t already been convinced that doing so is important this year. Remember, there is a drastic difference between the world today and the world prior to 2001.

Oh yeah, the first presidential debate is September 26th. The first and only vice presidential debate is October 2nd. They’re usually a good place to start if you don’t know much about the candidates.

Vice presidential picks.

August 30, 2008 / / 0 Comments

If you haven’t been following, the republican and democratic vice presidential nominees have both been chose. Obama picked Joe Biden while McCain chose Sarah Palin.

Biden is a long time senator. He actually ran for the presidential nomination but dropped out after performing badly in Iowa. I’m not particularly thrilled about him but he’s not terrible either. He just has a big mouth and knows how to use it. Anyway, here’s the pertinent info on him:

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/joe_biden.htm

Palin is the governor of Alaska. She’s held the position since 2006 and had some other minor executive branch experience prior to that. She seems pretty hardcore social conservative to me. She’s a member of the NRA, pro-life, anti-gay marriage, etc.. I actually don’t think she’s such a bad choice for McCain except that, to me, it highlights his desire to say and do what he thinks will get him elected instead of sticking to his guns. Basically, I believe he’s purposely chose a woman so that he could increase his chances of wooing disenfranchised Clinton supporters. Hell, Palin’s first speech contained praise for Hillary. Pander much? Anyway, I’m bias, but she does seem like a decent choice for getting McCain some conservative votes. Here’s the pertinent info on her:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Sarah_Palin.htm

I’m just trying to keep everyone up to date. Maybe some people who know me and aren’t interested in voting and whatnot will have a change of heart? Eh? Eh? Oh, and the democrats had their convention. Here’s Obama’s speech. It’s rather good.

Register to vote.

How Bush convinced me that voting matters.

June 5, 2008 / / 0 Comments

I can remember a time, not even all that long ago, when I didn’t care all that much about voting. I would usually only vote in the presidential elections and never, ever, ever for a democrat or republican. It wasn’t so much that I didn’t agree with their views, I didn’t even really know what their views were, it was more this subconscious feeling that there was something wrong with only having two realistic options in every election. Even more prominent was this feeling that no matter who was put in the White House my life really didn’t change at all. I didn’t feel effected in the slightest by the people running the country. This seemed to also manifest this feeling that these people were making empty promises since they always would talk about how things will be better when they’re put in office yet it never seemed to make anything better.. or worse.

What finally convinced me that it really does matter, that I’m effected, by who is put in charge of things was George W Bush’s presidency. Good ol’ GW managed to be so absurdly bad at running a country that there are now constant reminders to show how much a president can really do. It wasn’t some angelic savior of the people that made it obvious that the president determines the quality of life for Americans, it was a stubborn alcoholic who can’t even repeat a proverb correctly (anyone remember the “fool me once..” screw-up?). From our deteriorating dollar and all its economic implications, to the Iraq War, to soaring gas prices, to the attempts to strip Americans of constitutional rights, Bush has done a thorough job of showing how much power a president really has.

I won’t get into the details about all the ways he has screwed up, unless you somehow missed these things and would like me to, but I will draw some conclusions from this revelation. If one man can run a government into the ground so thoroughly, can one man or woman also turn our lives into cushy bastions of pleasure? Now that may be a stretch, but not all that much of a stretch. It’s not so much that every little thing will be taken care of and we’ll never have any worries, just that the opportunities to put ourselves into a position where we have no worries can be created. Do you know how much college costs now compared to 8 years ago? Do you know how much gas cost 8 years ago? Do you know how easy it was to find affordable housing 8 years ago? These are pretty concrete changes that effect everyone who doesn’t want to live with their mom for the rest of their lives. If we could fall off the wagon to this degree then I don’t see why we couldn’t hop back on that wagon with the right management and get it moving even faster.

I think there’s also this growing since of responsibility for one’s world that comes from getting older. As a child and a teenager you’re, usually, very sheltered from the realities of the world. Once that shelter disappears you start to realize, or at least I did, that the things that you seemed to be able to take for granted didn’t come without a cost. Some of this I realized when I lived in New York. I remember when it would get hard, and I’d be trying to stretch each penny, and my biggest concern was the idea of having to move back to south Jersey and take a hit to my pride when I needed to rely on a parental figure yet again. It made me think, what if I didn’t have those figures in my life? Parents aren’t there forever. There’s always that chance that you won’t have someone to pick you up in life when you’ve royally screwed yourself over. All those solutions that I could have followed up on when I lived in New York would have been necessary if I didn’t have some enormous safety net to fall back on.

The point I’m getting to is that, while it may seem like it on the surface, life is not something that should be taken for granted. Anything can happen and the world that seemed so safe and secure as a kid was really illusory. If you want to maintain that illusion you have to be proactive. When this stops seeming true, just remind yourself of what a guy like Bush can do to your life.

Newer posts »

© 2024 Josh McNeill

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑